Government planning to send welfare recipients to work in Northeast B.C.

[SpongeG]

thats the area i grew up in - could definately use the people from what i hear a real lack of workers up there, but i don't know about people being forced to go there but at the same time if thats where the jobs are...

Government planning to send welfare recipients to work in Northeast B.C.

The Provincial Government is working on a program that could see people who are on welfare sent to Northeastern B.C., for work. According to the Kamloops Daily News, Finance Minister Kevin Falcon presented the idea to the Kamloops Chamber of Commerce Tuesday.

The details of the program aren’t currently available, but Falcon told reporters the government is working on a welfare to work program.

Falcon said the government would put together a package that would fly them up to areas that need workers, provide accommodation and training and put them in available jobs.

The program would target jobs in northeast and northwest B.C. According to the article, Falcon admitted there would be costs associated with the program, but he believes those costs would be offset by reduced social assistance payments.

...

http://energeticcity.ca/article/news...k-northeast-bc

[Pinion]

Highly misleading headline. Makes it sound like mandatory Soviet style gulags.

[jlousa]

There used to be a program called workfare, the government would pay you to work in factories. They cancelled it because certain people didn't want to work and would destroy equipment making it cheaper for the government to just pay people to stay home, so it ended.
Not sure how it would be any more useful this time around, guess if it's completely optional then only those that really want to be there will apply.

[Canadian Mind]

I like the idea, but if it is volunteer, make it so the people who choose not to work don't get any money. We're emerging from hard financial times. Some would argue that we are still in it. either way, there is the grave risk of falling back into them again very soon. Why the hell should we as a society shoulder the burden of those who are outright unwilling to carry themselves.

Of course there are people who would be unable to work, but that's why I specified what I hope would be a very specific group of people.

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by Canadian Mind

I like the idea, but if it is volunteer, make it so the people who choose not to work don't get any money.

So you "volunteer" to work or starve? I was going to make a snarky comment about idiot conservatives probably being in favour of gulags for the poor, then decided against it because that would be unreasonably snarky. Sad to see my cynicism was justified.

Welfare is like $700 a month. A lot of people using it legitimately can't work for reasons beyond their control. We are (or at least were) a country that cares for vulnerable people.

Why do you have that avatar? Should ask galeforcewind if you can borrow his.

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by Canadian Mind

I like the idea, but if it is volunteer, make it so the people who choose not to work don't get any money. We're emerging from hard financial times. Some would argue that we are still in it. either way, there is the grave risk of falling back into them again very soon. Why the hell should we as a society shoulder the burden of those who are outright unwilling to carry themselves.

Of course there are people who would be unable to work, but that's why I specified what I hope would be a very specific group of people.

Well there are people who want to, "want to work", but cant "want to work" because the cant want to work, no matter how hard they try to want to.

Laziness, lethargy, lack of motivation, etc. are often a result of mental disorders, some that can be treated and others that cant. Often people know what they are, want to change, but cant because their "brain" simply isnt wired to do that, it can be no different then a blind person wanting to see, it just isnt possible.

My point is that although I agree with programs that can help people be productive, I also think that these programs can be destructive(as Jlousa mentioned one example). There needs to be a clear understanding that some people are sick, even if its often times not apparent, and that needs to be respected and taken in to account. Will be interesting to see what they are proposing.

[logicbomb]

I wouldn't mind this if we could specifically target the leeches, however, there's always a gray area with most circumstances (ie. Structural Violence).

For the record, I would venture to guess that more students fresh out of university will request social assistance. Most BA degrees are usually useless, and you enter this position where you are overqualified for most blue-collar work, and under-qualified for public and private sector jobs. Not to mention that the labour market is also extremely competitive given Vancouver's reputation of being a "world class" city.

I have a BASc in Civil Engineering; and my most feasible alternative is to move east . Luckily I worked my ass off throughout my teens and early 20's to at least keep myself out of debt.

edit: Or we could always halt the export of raw logs and bring back some industry to BC? No? Okay...

[RosstheBoss]

It's a tough problem welfare....I by no means want to take a struggling parent away from their kids for any longer than possible. We have to remember that most people on welfare do deserve welfare because of some reason or anther. That said there are a few lazy people take advantage of the system to not work.

What I am in favor of is subsidies, for those who are trying to work and support a family I believe that the government should subsidize income to bring extreme low income earners into a range where they can support themselves. To my knowledge, I could be wrong, when a person starts working they lose welfare. I think instead subsidizing work to be a bit higher than welfare is good in that it encourages people to work and also allows them to live.

Obviously not everyone is able to work, but I think especially for young single people, we need to give them incentive to work rather than just hand them a pay check.

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by RosstheBoss

It's a tough problem welfare....I by no means want to take a struggling parent away from their kids for any longer than possible. We have to remember that most people on welfare do deserve welfare because of some reason or anther. That said there are a few lazy people take advantage of the system to not work.

What I am in favor of is subsidies, for those who are trying to work and support a family I believe that the government should subsidize income to bring extreme low income earners into a range where they can support themselves. To my knowledge, I could be wrong, when a person starts working they lose welfare. I think instead subsidizing work to be a bit higher than welfare is good in that it encourages people to work and also allows them to live.

Obviously not everyone is able to work, but I think especially for young single people, we need to give them incentive to work rather than just hand them a pay check.

Well to be fair the welfare rate is $610 a month, I think most people can agree that this is not handing someone a paycheck.

I do think that a voluntary program to get people settled in remote areas where low skilled jobs and high paying jobs are in demand would be a big help for many on welfare (but not all). I can imagine success in many cases if someone guides a person to a remote area, helps them out and gets them connected with a high paying job that puts their welfare check to shame, and for a employer in desperate need of bodies who will be willing to work with the person long enough to create some stability for them.

Its not exactly easy to go and find a job somewhere remote, its even harder if your trying to do that while collecting $610 a month and already having personal problems dragging you down. But if you can get people like this a change of scenery and a good paying job, something unlikely in the bigger cities if their already on welfare, then thats a good catalyst for a person to change their life around if they want to/ are able to.

[Chadillaccc]

Holy crap!

If they need people that bad, how do I apply?
I've applied to a bunch of jobs out in Alberta and the territories but haven't heard a thing back.

Any of you guys know how I'd go about this?

[dreambrother808]

Living off $610/mo. is a pretty miserable existence. If someone chooses to suffer in that way rather then expending minimal effort to make at least twice that simply because they are "lazy", they are already punishing themselves, frankly.

Yes, they are "getting away" with something, but we can't build systems based upon the worst case scenarios. Most people would choose more money and a more productive life, given a healthy state of mind.

[Canadian Mind]

Originally Posted by Pinion

So you "volunteer" to work or starve? I was going to make a snarky comment about idiot conservatives probably being in favour of gulags for the poor, then decided against it because that would be unreasonably snarky. Sad to see my cynicism was justified.

Welfare is like $700 a month. A lot of people using it legitimately can't work for reasons beyond their control. We are (or at least were) a country that cares for vulnerable people.

Why do you have that avatar? Should ask galeforcewind if you can borrow his.

Originally Posted by Canadian Mind

I like the idea, but if it is volunteer, make it so the people who choose not to work don't get any money. We're emerging from hard financial times. Some would argue that we are still in it. either way, there is the grave risk of falling back into them again very soon. Why the hell should we as a society shoulder the burden of those who are outright unwilling to carry themselves.

Of course there are people who would be unable to work, but that's why I specified what I hope would be a very specific group of people.

Re-read my post, my whole post. That "specific" group of people would be those who choose the option of not working at all, and therefore should receive no money. I know enough people who abuse the system to know these kinds of people are out there. In no way did I suggest taking welfare away from those who need it the most. I had hoped I was clear enough in that regard.

Further, I personally take offence to the "idiot conservative" comment. It is entirely unwarranted. I am a socialist at heart. And while some of my opinions may come across as outright neo-conservative, forgive me when I expect people who take from the system to give back to it at some point. The system simply will not survive if everybody takes. Just look at Greece!

With that, I expect an apology.




Carrying on, I like some of the other ideas coming up in this thread as well. The demand for workers up north is huge. Alberta is going to have around 300 000 new positions in the energy sector alone by 2015. That's huge, real huge. That figure doesn't unrelated industries. Not only will this put a demand on BC secondary industries to supply this energy mammoth with the resources it needs to develop it's energy industry, but we also have our own, smaller energy industry in the northeast of the province. It might not seem apparent in Vancouver, but there is a huge labour shortage in the north, and it's only going to get bigger. Plus the land is far cheaper, and companies don't like having to pay for round-trip tickets to Vancouver every two weeks. They'd rather hire "local," and if we can encourage more people to move north and become "local," the better off the resource companies, our economy, and our overall standard of living will be.

I'd like to see a broader subsidization program in place for education, but beyond the price of tuition. With these impending labour shortages, if the government and private sector could get together to fund a program whereby people's education and living expenses are subsidized (or outright paid for) while they go through school, followed by a period where they must work for a company in the north for an allotted number of years. During these years, the recipient of these subsidies must pay a portion of their wages back to the government, something like 1/4-1/3rd their wage. The objective wouldn't be to outright pay off their debt, but to help give back to what they withdrew from. As well, the companies would have to give the government extra money in exchange for producing educated, guaranteed workers. While the program would cost money on the grand scheme of things, the higher revenue generated from income and corporate taxes will offset the costs, if not lead to an overall surplus.

Along with this, I can understand relocating to the north can be difficult. Not just because of the costs, but because of the uncertainties of being somewhere new. Expanding on Cornholio's idea, have a separate but related program entirely dedicated to helping people settle in the north. Things such as government/government-subsidised housing for new residents, people dedicated to showing newcomers around the area & just being that go-to person when you have a problem, money for business startups, etc. Effectively, make the north easy to move to for as many people as possible.

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Holy crap!

If they need people that bad, how do I apply?
I've applied to a bunch of jobs out in Alberta and the territories but haven't heard a thing back.

Any of you guys know how I'd go about this?

You go there in person. The problem is that many employers have learned that taking applications and hiring from outside their area is a bad idea for low skilled jobs. It is difficult to find a place to live, and to get settled in a remote area. Also generally speaking they target people in rural areas and smaller cities where people are exposed to the life in these areas.

If you want a job simply get in a car and go, find a hotel, rent a apartment in the area, and go send out resumes. Sending them with a Vancouver address will not get you much luck, for example in Fort Mac most employers even though they are desperate only consider people living in the area already, or work with recruiters in smaller cities that interview the people and help them move and settle.

I have one friend who lived in interior BC for years and on the advice of friends decided to pack it up and move to Red Deer last year. Found a hotel and put out 3 resumes, all three he got interviews, and picked one for camp work in Northern Alberta. Took him one week to do a few simple certificates (the one day, types) and was off for his first camp term for nearly two month term doing low skilled labor work (rig hand or what ever). Got just under $500 per day, 7 days a week, 12 hours shifts, for 50 days(supposedly the limit was 21 days but they had no one to go up and replace them so it stretched out). Said the work is mostly easy with long stretches of down time, so not like working 84 hours per week. He said there is piles of work, the problem is you have to go there in person for the low skilled jobs.

[Alex Mackinnon]

This seems like a pretty good idea to me. I don't have experience in that part of the province as much, but I've been doing some other work up north with the hydro industry.

The last project I was on we we're flying people out of Kamloops to Smithers for probably $25/hr to work as unskilled construction labour and drill hands. It ain't rocket science, one of the guys we picked up had no construction or mining experience and worked in a restaurant for the past few years.

Most projects up there we generally try to hire local labour, but when you're in competition with longer term gas jobs you end up having to fly considerable amounts of labour in at a cost of between $100-200/day per person depending on where you are.

It's a big bottom line killer, so you can bet most companies would love to hire local, then not have to pay for a hotel, a round trip every few weeks and a live out allowance; even if they have to give you some training.

[SpongeG]

Originally Posted by RosstheBoss

It's a tough problem welfare....I by no means want to take a struggling parent away from their kids for any longer than possible. We have to remember that most people on welfare do deserve welfare because of some reason or anther. That said there are a few lazy people take advantage of the system to not work.

What I am in favor of is subsidies, for those who are trying to work and support a family I believe that the government should subsidize income to bring extreme low income earners into a range where they can support themselves. To my knowledge, I could be wrong, when a person starts working they lose welfare. I think instead subsidizing work to be a bit higher than welfare is good in that it encourages people to work and also allows them to live.

Obviously not everyone is able to work, but I think especially for young single people, we need to give them incentive to work rather than just hand them a pay check.

they do subsidize low income families, low income families get half or sometimes more of their rent paid cause the jobs they have are low paying and they have kids etc to support and raise

your welfare would be affected if you started to work, i don't think you are eligible to collect much once you start working, even if you get a part time job at minimum wage your welfare is cut down quite a lot thats why so many just stay on welfare rather than working, its very hard to get back in the system